Pirate's Cove

Warmists are always trying to get Other People to believe in anthropogenic climate change, finding new and inventive methods. Of course, actually providing rock solid scientific evidence has escaped the Cult of Climastrology, being something that is virtually impossible to do, and inference is not causality. Hence, we get things such as this

7 Advantages for Republicans if They Owned the Climate Debate

Now that a global climate deal has been struck in Paris, it’s up to each nation to live up to its commitments. Republicans leaders in Congress have vowed to fight anything to do with climate change. But there are many good reasons smart Republicans should reevaluate their resistance to both science and the global consensus, and in 2016 make climate change a political issue of their own.

Here are those 7

1. Climate change is an immigration issue.
Climate change will hit the crowded tropics worst. Droughts, floods and severe storms in Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean could cause massive northward migrations on a scale dwarfing what Europe experienced last year. Accepting climate change would help Republicans end the stalemate on illegal immigration and push for a realistic and comprehensive policy that prepares us for the future of mass immigrations. (See my recent blog post, Why Trump’s Wall won’t Work.

Got that? Republicans should not only accept what is mostly a left-leaning political position on Hotcoldwetdry, but also the left-leaning position on immigration.

Here’s the other 6

• Nuclear energy could make a comeback (there’s no need to believe in Hotcoldwetdry to push nuclear, and, heck, let’s not forget that the few Warmists who push nuclear get shut down by the rest of the CoC)
• Better alignment with the military (the military that must take the viewpoints of the CiC.)
• Ending the era of oil will diminish the clout of non-democratic regimes (a bit of rhetorical jujitsu. Instead, we could develop our own sources on our own property, along with dealing with countries such as Canada)
• Oil would no longer fuel conflict in the Middle East. (no worries, the hardcore Islamists would continue with the main reason, namely, what’s written in the Koran)
• Personal integrity (this, coming from people who demand everyone else comply with the tenants of Hotcoldwetdry, yet refuse to modify their own lives to comply)
• Denying climate change may cost Republicans the next election (doubtful. Climate change is typically last or next to last on the list of concerns by American voters. Many may believe, but, they do not care all that much)

Then we get

Ironically, Republican presidents have a great history when it comes to the environment. Nixon created the EPA. Teddy Roosevelt started the National Park system. If Republicans owned climate change as their own issue, then they could set the debate on whether government programs and carbon taxes should lead the way, or private enterprise and tax incentives. Isn’t that a debate worth having in an election year?

‘Climate change’ is not an environmental issue, it is a political issue. And it is cute how Republicans are supposed to embrace taxation as a policy to “solve” climate change. In other words, this whole thing is about Republicans acting like Democrats.